New
Natural Language
Works The Way
You Already Think

by

You've been programming in a totally
unnatural language ever since you wrote your first line of assembly language.
Ask several assembly language programmers to jot down how to do
something using DOS or BIOS and their answers will probably look similar.
To illustrate this point, let's look at a couple of examples:

Q: How do you select 640x480x16c graphics mode?
A: Use BIOS interrupt 10h with:
ah=0; al=13h.
Q: How do you write a buffer of data to a file handle?
A: Use DOS interrupt 21h with:
ah=40h; bx=handle; cx=count;
ds=seg buffer; dx=offset buffer.
On return, carry is clear if successful.

One of the first things you'll notice in these examples is the use of the equal
sign to indicate assignment or MOV. Isn't it peculiar that
everybody knows exactly what is meant by the equal sign,
but the assembler forces you to use the mnemonic MOV?
When you take into account that MOV is by far the most
common instruction used in an assembly language program that's a whole lot
of extra work. Extra stuff for you to think about, to write, to read. It's a real
waste of your time, not to mention disk space and bandwidth as well. Notice
that the examples above also are written with more than one "thought" on a
line. And why not? The meaning is clear and it conserves vertical space.
There is nothing inherently wrong with placing more than one thought
on a line, assembly just doesn't lend itself to that style.

These are just two cases where a natural intuitive syntax is used in everyday
communication between assembly language programmers, but when it comes
time to actually write the code, you have to conform to a primitive syntax
devised some forty years ago! Wouldn't it be nice to be able to use the
symbols you've been using your whole life, like +,
-, *, /, etc., to convey your
ideas to the assembler?

What if I told you...

there was a language that delivered all of the control
available in assembly language, but looked almost exactly like the
notation you already use every day?

What if I told you...

there was a language that featured structured flow
control with automatic label generation?

What if I told you...

this language has been in existence since 1987 and has
been proven in medical, military, industrial, and commercial
applications?

What if I told you...

that the compiler was tiny (23,917 bytes), lightning
fast and thoroughly debugged?

What if I told you...

it was compatible with your existing tools and you could
use it to maintain existing assembly language legacy code?

What if I told you...

it was compatible with all x86 processors, not only the
ones available today, but also those that will be announced in
the future?

What if I told you...

it was available today offered Risk FREE at a
veryreasonable price?

Well, pinch yourself, you're not dreaming, it's all true! The
future is NOW! The programming language you've been
dreaming of is:

If everybody was using and you asked the same questions mentioned above, the
answers might just look like:

Q: How do you select 640x480x16c graphics mode?
A: Use BIOS:
ah=0; al=13h; !10h;
Q: How do you write a buffer of data to a file handle?
A: Use DOS:
ah=40h; bx=handle; cx=count;
ds=S(buffer); dx=O(buffer);
!21h; <